On 10/18/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Nils Erik Svangård</b> <<a href="mailto:nilserik@gmail.com">nilserik@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hello!<br>Last year I did my master thesis which consisted of converting and old<br>fortran based CFD application using block structured explicit solver<br>to use the PETSc framework.<br>Now my mentor/supervisor has contacted me again, they are thinking
<br>about doing a unstructured solver and are looking at PETSc.<br>I said that I think using PETSc is a good idea, and if they are going<br>to write new code I think they should look at using C++ instead of<br>Fortran (because I think C++ is better suported by PETSc).
<br>Was my advice any good? Any other advices they should look at before beginning?</blockquote><div><br>While we do fully support Fortran, we have new more advanced features in C++, so<br>I think yor advice was good as long as they can be comfortable in C++ :) There is new
<br>support for unstructured meshes in PETSc. It is still in alpha release, so it is not in the<br>same category as the other PETSc structures, but I would encourage them to look at<br>it. I recently gave a tutorial at Columbia (which I will post on the web tonight), which
<br></div>demonstrates some of this.<br><br> Thanks,<br><br> Matt<br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">best regards<br>
/nisse<br><br>--<br>Nils-Erik Svangård<br>E-Mail: <a href="mailto:nilserik@gmail.com">nilserik@gmail.com</a><br>MSN: <a href="mailto:nilserik@gmail.com">nilserik@gmail.com</a><br>Skype: schweingaard<br>Mobil: +46-(0)70-3612178
<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>"Failure has a thousand explanations. Success doesn't need one" -- Sir Alec Guiness